Democrats discover a public speaker worse than Bush

While it would be nice not to have to say so quite so often, George W is not as incoherent as the Democrats would have us believe. What is strange is that they have used this strategy against other Republican candidates in the past without, as far as I’m aware, having notched up any successes. See if you can guess who they’re attacking in this Lancaster, PA publication:

The Universal Clothes Wringer and the literary style date this excerpt fairly well, and if I tell you that Mr X–like Mr Bush–was not far off being a Baptist and chose to invoke not just “the considerate judgment of mankind”, but also “the gracious favor of Almighty God” in support of his war of liberation, then I’ll be surprised if you need to check the article by Jack Brubaker in Lancaster New Era or the original research by Mike Smith published in the journal of the Lancaster County Historical Society to figure out that we’re dealing with Lincoln.

I don’t know to what extent public debates in the second half of the nineteenth century were prepared in advance or subsequently edited, but, if the confrontations between Lincoln and Douglas during the 1858 Senate campaign are anything to go by, Lincoln was a formidable speaker. I wonder whether Blair would be regarded as the finest orator of recent times if he too spoke with the “high keyed, unpleasant voice” that people recalled of Lincoln.

(A favourite Lincoln quote, from a speech made to a temperance society:

Let’s lay off the George-W-is-a-stoopid-drunk line as well, OK?)

Related posts

• Public brothel in Barcelona
• Osama for pres!
• Video of sheep near the Bielsa tunnel
• Book dumping
• Revisionist histories

Comments

Feeds: RSS2 · Atom

Trackback link.

Tell me if the spam dragon gives you a hard time. Log in if you want to be really foul.